Sunday Morning Greek Blog

May 12, 2023

Strength from Forgiveness (Psalm 51; 1 Timothy 1:12–17)

Filed under: 1 Timothy,2 Samuel,Biblical Studies,Faith, Faithfulness,Greek,Hebrew,Repentance,Soteriology — Scott Stocking @ 6:27 pm
Tags: , ,
Click above to listen to message.

Sermon preached at Mt. View Presbyterian Church, September 11, 2022. Edited for publication.

There is no price we can pay or effort we can make to compel God to give us mercy or grace.

I think most of us are familiar with the story of David and Bathsheba. One evening (we don’t know how late, but the text says David had gotten out bed), David was out on the roof of his palace looking over the city when he saw at a nearby neighbor’s house the beautiful Bathsheba bathing (2 Sam 11:2–5). In that moment, David forgot he was otherwise known as a man after God’s own heart. The key word there is “forgot.” David should have known better. Bathsheba was not some exhibitionist bathing for all of Jerusalem to see. She had in that culture that valued purity and faithfulness a reasonable expectation of privacy. Most likely there were civic codes that prevented you from building your home in such a way as to risk violating your neighbor’s privacy. For example, in some Mediterranean cultures, they had rules that you couldn’t have a window in your house that allowed you to see directly into your neighbor’s house or back yard, especially if such a window was on the second floor. The palace may have been large enough to be exempted from such rules, but the principle existed nonetheless.

Add to this that shame of nakedness in that day would not have been on the one who was naked outside, especially if she had a right to privacy, but the shame would have been on the one who looked upon the nakedness. That is why Noah’s sons had to back into the tent to cover their naked, drunk father after the flood. David should have known immediately to avert his gaze and go somewhere else where such a view was not possible. It may be that David was on the roof of his palace, perhaps trying to get a view of the distant battle or the campfires of the troops or just to take in the cooler air. It would not have been a normal place for him to hang out. David had several opportunities to do the right thing in this situation, but the more he looked, the more he wanted Bathsheba. He could have done nothing at that point except walk away, but he didn’t. Instead, he sent someone to bring Bathsheba to him. He lay with her and got her pregnant.

And if that wasn’t bad enough, he tried to manipulate the situation by first giving Uriah, Bathsheba’s husband, a break from the battle in the hopes he would lay with Bathsheba and some might not question the paternity of the baby. But Uriah showed more integrity than David, so David sent him back to the battle with instructions to his commander, Joab, to manipulate the battle in such a way that Uriah would surely perish, and he did.

Of course, we know that David’s sin was exposed by the prophet Nathan, and we see David’s repentant, godly response in Psalm 51.

Read Psalm 51:1–10

1 Have mercy on me, O God, according to your unfailing love;

according to your great compassion blot out my transgressions.

2 Wash away all my iniquity and cleanse me from my sin.

3 For I know my transgressions, and my sin is always before me.

4 Against you, you only, have I sinned and done what is evil in your sight;

so you are right in your verdict and justified when you judge.

5 Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me.

6 Yet you desired faithfulness even in the womb; you taught me wisdom in that secret place.

7 Cleanse me with hyssop, and I will be clean; wash me, and I will be whiter than snow.

8 Let me hear joy and gladness; let the bones you have crushed rejoice.

9 Hide your face from my sins and blot out all my iniquity.

10 Create in me a pure heart, O God, and renew a steadfast spirit within me.

11 Do not cast me from your presence or take your Holy Spirit from me.

12 Restore to me the joy of your salvation and grant me a willing spirit, to sustain me. [1]

So David is busted. Found out. Exposed. It was pointless for him to deny it. And he didn’t live in a culture where such behavior, especially in the political class, would be ignored and swept under the rug. He had to face his maker. And he chose the best path, the only path, really, to put him on the road to restoration. God was giving his anointed a chance to come clean through the prophet Nathan’s intervention, and David accepted. He pleaded with God for mercy and owned up to his mistake.

This word for “mercy” here, (חָנַן ḥā·nǎn), is almost always used in the context of someone speaking, more so than in a running narrative that tells a story. The New International Version tends to translate it based on the perspective of the speaker. In the current passage, and for about one-third of the total occurrences of the word in the OT, if the speaker knows they’ve done wrong and they ask for ḥānǎn, the translators use the word “mercy.” On the other hand, if the speaker has acted justly and feels threatened by the enemy, or is referencing the goodness of God generally, the translators usually use “gracious” or “generous” for the word. That sense of the word represents about half the total occurrences of the word. These two primary meanings represent a modern distinction that some have made between “mercy” and “grace.” “Mercy” is not getting what you deserve, while “grace” is getting what you don’t deserve or didn’t earn. In both cases, it is a gift of God. And in both cases, there is no price we can pay or effort we can make to compel God to give us mercy or grace. We can ask for it, we can search for it, but the “price” for such a gift can only be paid by God, which he ultimately did through Jesus on the cross.

This is where the other key word in Psalm 51:1 comes in, a Hebrew word you’ve most likely heard before if you been in church or Bible studies for any length of time: חֶסֶד (ḥě·sěḏ), God’s “unfailing love.” Of the 245 times this word is used in the OT, well over three-fourths of the occurrences refer to God’s enduring, unfailing love and kindness. And nearly half of the uses of the word are found in the Psalms, including in the praise Psalm 136, where “His love (ḥěsěḏ) endures forever” is a repeated refrain at the end of each of its 26 verses.

As one Bible dictionary puts it, ḥěsěḏ is not a “disposition,” that is, it’s not just a feeling or a certain way of thinking. It is in the end a helpful act of God rooted in his covenant relationship to us, or when applied to us mortals, our helpful acts of love toward family and friends. It is an overflow of his righteousness, mercy, and shalom peace. As a covenant responsibility, David expects to and has a certain level of assurance that he will be forgiven. This is the same assurance we have when we come to Jesus: “If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness” (1 John 1:9). As I said above, there’s nothing we can do to earn this, but we can and should respond to it with a ḥěsěḏ of our own. “We love because he first loved us” (1 John 4:19). Not only is this ḥěsěḏ toward God, but toward our family and friends as well.

In vv. 5–6, David gives us a contrast between the way we are and the way God wants us to be. I want to use the English Standard Version translation of these two verses here because I think they’re a little less interpretive of the Hebrew text, and come much closer to what David was trying to convey:

5  Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me.

6  Behold, you delight in truth in the inward being, and you teach me wisdom in the secret heart.[2]

On the one hand, David realizes he is a sinner in need of God’s grace. But on the other hand, David knows that only God can transform his inner being into the godly character he desires. God knew David was a sinner in need of his grace, and that David might fall short of the ḥěsěḏ standard miserably at times, but he still chooses him anyway to lead his people. Verse 5 is similar to Paul’s essay in Romans 7 about doing what he doesn’t want to do and recognizing that sin still may try to get a stranglehold on him. But by sending the prophet to David, God is giving David a chance to come clean, to repent, and he does. God doesn’t ostracize or “cancel” his anointed because of one or two or five or ten mistakes. God’s ḥěsěḏ requires our willingness to be taught and to seek his truth to transform our inner being. God is forever the God of the next chance. God’s gift and his calling on our lives are without repentance, “irrevocable” (Romans 11:29). So no matter how many times you think you’ve failed or fallen short, know that he has called you for a purpose, and that he is guiding you and strengthening you in his ḥěsěḏ love to bring about his will.

Verses 10–12 give us a glimpse of how we get God’s truth in our inward being and his wisdom in our “secret” heart. After forgiving us and cleansing us, David recognizes that he must immerse himself in the presence of God to experience the restoration and renewal that awaits him. This is not a passive process: David goes on in the psalm to commit himself to teaching others about God’s ways and singing the praises of God aloud.

Verse 12, then, ties into our Gospel reading this morning from Luke 15: Both the shepherd and the woman have lost something of value. In the case of the shepherd, he leaves behind everything of value he does have, that is, the flock, to find the one sheep that is missing. This is what God does for us to bring us back to him.

In the case of the woman, she must clean her whole household to find the missing coin. David asked God to “cleanse” him with hyssop and remove from him all that would keep him from experiencing God to the fullest. Notice that he didn’t pledge to clean up his own life. God doesn’t need to wait for us to do that on our own. He meets us where we are and works with us from that point forward to bring restoration.

For both the shepherd and woman, there is rejoicing for finding what was lost and restoring it to its rightful place. Jesus draws the parallels there with both stories to the heavens rejoicing when one sinner repents. When we know God is with us, we can feel assured of our salvation, our calling, and the power of his ḥěsěḏ love.

Before I wrap up this morning, I want to bring in a passage that shows how this transformation from sin to victory worked itself out in Paul’s life. Let’s look at 1 Timothy 1:12–17:

12 I thank Christ Jesus our Lord, who has given me strength, that he considered me trustworthy, appointing me to his service. 13 Even though I was once a blasphemer and a persecutor and a violent man, I was shown mercy because I acted in ignorance and unbelief. 14 The grace of our Lord was poured out on me abundantly, along with the faith and love that are in Christ Jesus.

15 Here is a trustworthy saying that deserves full acceptance: Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners—of whom I am the worst. 16 But for that very reason I was shown mercy so that in me, the worst of sinners, Christ Jesus might display his immense patience as an example for those who would believe in him and receive eternal life. 17 Now to the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only God, be honor and glory for ever and ever. Amen.[3]

We only need to look at verse 13 to see how far Paul was from the Christian faith. First of all, he calls himself a blasphemer, which by itself would have been enough to get him stoned to death in Israel. But in context here, he’s probably referring to his initial denial of Christ as Lord and his approval of the stoning of Stephen, because the Jews thought Stephen had blasphemed in his final, fatal message. Paul was a persecutor. He thought this new Jesus movement was so dangerous to traditional Judaism that the followers had to be jailed or snuffed out, violently if necessary. He even admits to acting ignorantly and in unbelief, and that he was the worst of all sinners.

Yet with all that, God still chose to use Paul to be the main messenger of the faith in the northern Mediterranean region. He humbly gives thanks and praise for all that God has done for him and is doing through him. His life would be the ultimate testimony of the transforming power of God’s grace and salvation.

I want to focus for a moment here on verse 12, because I believe that parallels what David’s desire was in his psalm of repentance: “I thank Christ Jesus our Lord, who has given me strength.” I guess you could say Paul was “fortunate” enough to have a direct revelation from Jesus to set his life in the right direction. Granted, that was probably a pretty scary situation for him, as it would be for any of us, I imagine. But the attempt to turn a violent and desperate man from his ways required corresponding radical action of God to set him straight. That seems to have been enough, at least initially, to have “strengthened” Paul, because we see very soon after his conversion in Acts 9:22 that Luke tells us, “Saul (Paul) grew more and more powerful (or strengthened) and baffled the Jews living in Damascus by proving that Jesus is the Messiah.” He relates his own story here so that in 2 Timothy 2:1, he can also encourage Timothy to be strong in God’s grace as well. Having the examples of men and women of faith, both in the Bible and in our own lives, will help us stay grounded in the faith and give us strength and endurance for our Christian walk. The author of Hebrews said it well:

Therefore, since we are surrounded by such a great cloud of witnesses, let us throw off everything that hinders and the sin that so easily entangles. And let us run with perseverance the race marked out for us, 2 fixing our eyes on Jesus, the pioneer and perfecter of faith. For the joy set before him he endured the cross, scorning its shame, and sat down at the right hand of the throne of God. 3 Consider him who endured such opposition from sinners, so that you will not grow weary and lose heart.[4]

My friends, do not lose heart. Every day, lift up the Lord Jesus in your life through word and deed, and give God the praise and glory he deserves.

Now to the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only God, be honor and glory for ever and ever. Amen.[5]

[1] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[2] The Holy Bible: English Standard Version. 2016. Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles.

[3] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[4] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[5] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

March 30, 2023

The Temple of Artemis of the Ephesians as Background for Understanding 1 Timothy 2

Filed under: 1 Timothy,Biblical Studies,Ecclesiology,Faith, Faithfulness,Genesis,Greek,Women in Leadership — Scott Stocking @ 11:18 pm
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

[If you like this article, please check out the curated lists at the top of my home page.]

Who are the “women” Paul is writing about in 1 Timothy 2 & 3? This is an important question to ask and answer if someone is just going to look at the surface text and make unfounded claims about the Bible contradicting itself about the role of women in the faith, as Steve Wells does in The Skeptic’s Annotated Bible. A basic understanding of the context and setting of this epistle will clear up many of the contradictions he alleges. Let’s dive in.

Setting and Context

Paul wrote two letters to Timothy that survived to the time of the codification of the New Testament. If you follow Timothy’s ministry through the New Testament, you will find that Timothy was not only a close companion to Paul, but that he also seems to have been acting in the role of an apostle. Paul has seemingly appointed Timothy to succeed him after 2 years of successful ministry in Ephesus.

Ephesus was a major trade and port city in western Asia Minor (modern-day Turkey) at the time and featured the Temple of Artemis (Greek; in the Roman pantheon, she was equated with Diana), a fertility goddess. The temple was considered one of the seven wonders of the ancient world. According to the Holman Illustrated Bible Dictionary, the Greek goddess Artemis, at least according to the depictions discovered in Ephesus, “was portrayed as a more mature woman. Her robe is draped in such a way as to expose her bosom, which is covered with multiple breasts, depicting her gift of fertility and nurture.[1]” The ceremonies were conducted by eunuch priests and virgin priestesses.

Being a priestess in ancient Greece was one of the few things a woman could do to have power and influence. Otherwise, the women typically had few rights in Greece. These priestesses and the laypeople of Ephesus may have had a lot of knowledge about their goddess, but the tenure of a priestess of Artemis of Ephesus was typically short; they would typically transition from a virgin priestess to wife and mother while they were still young enough to bear children.[2] Although little to no evidence exists of any temple prostitution in Ephesus,[3] the rituals surrounding the worship of a fertility goddess and the attire and adornment of the priestesses may be part of what Paul is addressing in 1 Timothy 2. One must keep in mind, unlike Mr. Wells, that these epistles were written in a specific cultural context to a specific demographic group, so the specific statements may reflect cultural nuances without violating the underlying principles of Scripture.

One other thing to keep in mind here, at least from my perspective. The King James Version was a valuable translation in its day, but with the advent of more source materials and a better understanding of textual transmission principles over the centuries, not to mention the evolution of the English language in the 400+ years since it was first translated, these factors may cause some to misunderstand the nuances of certain terms, because they may not mean the same in 2023 as they did in the late 19th century, when the last update to the official KJV was published. With that in mind, then, let’s look at the text in 1 Timothy 2, specifically in regard to the passages on women.

Parallel Structure of 1 Timothy 2

General Exhortations (2:1–7)Directed Teachings to Leaders (2:8–15)
1–2a: Paul urges prayer for all8a: Paul wants men to lift up holy hands in prayer and thanksgiving
2b–3: peaceful and quiet (hēsychios) lives; good (beautiful) and pleasing to God8b–12: without anger or disputing; modesty, propriety, good (moral) deeds; learn in quietness (hēsychia)
4–6: wants all people to be saved13–15: analogy: women “saved”/“kept safe”  through childbearing
7: Hinge verse describing Paul’s purpose3:1 Hinge verse to discussion of formal leadership positions

“Women” Generally in 1 Timothy 2 and 3

In 1 Timothy 2:8–10, Paul is giving a parallel set of instructions for men and women generally, and he puts them on the same level by using the adverb ὡσαύτως (hōsautōs, “in the same way”). This adverb typically implies a similarity of position or status, both with the people that are modified in the comparison and the actions or sometimes the settings associated with those people thus compared. So in vs. 8, Paul “desires” or “wishes” that “men in every place” to pray without contention. The use of hōsautōs in vs. 9 compels us to take the indicative verb from vs. 8 (Βούλομαι, boulomai) as governing the predicate in vs. 9. (If there’s any question about this, the same thing happens in the very next chapter for three groups of leaders.) Paul “desires” or “wishes” the women to “adorn” (κοσμέω, kosmeō) themselves in “appropriate [κόσμιος, kosmios] clothing” (notice the similar semantic root for both words). The same adjective is used in 3:2 of the overseer, but is translated “good behavior.”

Another character trait Paul expects of the women in vs. 9 is the noun σωφροσύνη (sōphrosynē), which is translated “sobriety” in the KJV, but “propriety” in the NIV. The word can also mean “sound judgment,” “self-discipline,” or “self-control.” The adjectival form of that word, σώφρων (sōphrōn), is used of the overseer in 3:2. At this point, it’s safe to say Paul had similar expectations of men and women generally that he had of those identified as “overseers,” a seemingly formal leadership designation in the New Testament.[4] Of course, there are certain stereotypical behaviors (at least in Paul’s day) that were thought to be gender specific, so we shouldn’t expect Paul to have the exact same set of behavioral expectations for men and women.

Now that we’ve looked at the terminology, let’s apply this to the cultural situation in Ephesus, specifically with respect to the priestesses who served in the Temple of Artemis. The Ephesians, especially the women, would have most likely looked up to these priestesses as examples of holiness, so it’s reasonable that the women would have wanted to dress like them as well. One only need to search for images of “priestess of Artemis” to see that these priestesses wore braided hair, pearls, and gold jewelry. Paul didn’t want these Christian converts, some of whom may have been former priestesses or temple workers themselves, to appear like pagan religious leaders. In today’s world, Paul might encourage women not to dress like some of the “Real Housewives” or other Hollywood stars who aren’t afraid to flash their flesh and their wealth.

Wells considers verse 9 “misogyny and insults to women” according to the symbol he used, but as I’ve shown, nothing could be further from the truth here. Paul expresses similar standards for men and women, so he’s treating women as equals. This will be further demonstrated as we analyze the next two verses.

Paul Addresses Church Leadership (2:11–12)

Paul follows up these general exhortations to men and women to a particular discussion on how to address the teaching of women in Ephesus. On the surface, the passage admittedly appears to have some misogynistic undertones, but a look into the background of the Greek text considering the cultural setting, we will again see quite the opposite. Let’s look at vv. 11–12, my translation:

A woman must learn in an orderly manner in all subjection; I do not permit a woman to teach, nor to have inappropriate authority over a man, but to behave in an orderly manner.

First, Paul shifts from talking to “women” in the plural in vs. 9 to about “a woman” (anarthrous, i.e., without the definite article) in vs. 11. Is this just a stylistic difference? Perhaps. But I think what is more likely here is that Paul is referring to “a” or “any” woman who wants to learn about the Gospel of Christ, and perhaps even to be a leader in the church at some point in the future (see, for example, 1 Tim 3:11).

These women very likely could have included women who were transitioning out of the Artemisian priesthood into civilian life. They had knowledge of a goddess, but of course this goddess was nothing like Jesus Christ or his father, the one true God. I think a reasonable assumption here is that Paul didn’t want to run the risk of them introducing pagan beliefs into the pure Christian Gospel Timothy was appointed to teach and proclaim. It was about maintaining order and decorum in the educational setting, not turning it into an Athenian Mars Hill philosophers’ debate! It’s also highly likely that these women were being taught by widows or older women already established in the Christian faith, and not by men, so the “subjection” may not have been to men (cf. 1 Timothy 5:9–16; Titus 2:3–4).

You probably noticed in my translation that I didn’t use a form of the word “quiet” for ἡσυχία (hēsychia), but rather used the phrase “in an orderly manner.” (Both times it is a prepositional phrase and is not a command, as some translations make it at the end of vs. 12.) I think this translation better fits the context here.[5] The adjective form of this noun is used in vs. 2 to speak of Paul’s desire that everyone “live peaceful and quiet (or ordered) lives in all godliness and holiness.” Paul doesn’t want these women teaching right away or trying to take over in the educational setting, nor does he want them usurping the authority of the man who is overseeing the teaching. This is the only time in the NT this Greek word (αὐθεντέω authenteō) is used for authority, so it’s apparently the type of authority that Paul himself would never use or claim.

“Saved Through Childbearing” (vv. 13–15) Reconsidered

In the last part of chapter 2, Paul uses the Creation account to make his summary point on what he’s discussed in chapter 2. Verses 13 and 14 give a true account of what happened in Genesis 1–3, but Paul stops short of saying that Adam also ate of the fruit. I admit that this could be a bit of “she did it first” mentality, but Paul is generally not that petty. Why does he point out that Eve was deceived and not Adam? Perhaps the better question to ask is, “Why was Eve deceived when there was a direct command from God not to do what she did?” Is God responsible for Eve’s deception? I think not. In the Creation narrative, Adam received the command from God before Eve was created as his helper. So, is it possible that Adam failed to teach or warn Eve about the forbidden fruit? It’s hard to imagine he didn’t tell her everything. Even so, the point of the passage is that Eve was the one who violated the sacred order, so God’s mitigation was the restoration of that sacred order, that the male would be the head in the relationship. There’s nothing there to indicate the rule was authoritarian or absent of genuine love in any way. The woman only had to endure pain in childbirth. Man’s “rule” came at the expense of doing the hard labor to work the land and provide a living for them both and their descendants.

Adam had given up his place of authority God had established in the created order and followed the woman’s lead instead of God’s lead when it came to the forbidden fruit, and the results were disastrous for all of humanity. Is this the usurpation Paul is talking about in verse 12? It may very well be. Based on that, then, I would like to put forth that Paul’s argument here implies that part of the male’s redemptive task is to recapture the original design for him to be a teacher. This isn’t to say women can’t teach; it’s clear from other Scriptures they can. But again, this may be to counter some of the influence that the (former) priestesses may have had, at least until they could be established in their newfound Christian faith, so that order can be maintained.

The final verse about women being “saved through childbearing” would seem to take on whole new meaning when contrasted with the virgin priestesses of the Temple of Artemis of the Ephesians (see “Additional Note” below). For those women, their virginity was their form of holiness for however many years they served in the temple. It may have been difficult for some of them who were transitioning into married life to adapt to the idea that they could still be considered “holy” and “saved” when they started having children. Verse 15 was Paul’s way of saying that, even in their new lives, they were still important members of the body of Christ. They had traded in a certain degree of autonomy as a priestess for the domestic life of a wife and perhaps a lesser member of Greek society, but Paul’s statement in vs. 15 is intended to elevate them in the Christian society to a critical role in fulfilling the creation mandate to “be fruitful and multiply.”[6]

Conclusion

Now, where was I? Oh, yes, I set out to address some of the alleged contradictions and misogynist statement in Steven Wells poorly researched The Skeptic’s Annotated Bible, especially in the much-debated passage about men’s and women’s roles in 1 Tim 2:8–15. I don’t have space to deal with the petty contradictions where he’s comparing apples to oranges. He identifies three instances of misogyny in 2:9–15, all of which I have addressed above. The issue of modest dress was to contrast with the cult and culture of the priestesses in the pagan Temple of Artemis of Ephesus. The same adjective about propriety is used of both women and the overseer in 3:2. I’ve shown that the “in silence” was not necessarily muteness, but has to do with maintaining a proper order in the church, and that it was used of both men and women. The prohibition on teaching is likely a cultural stopgap measure until the Ephesian women, some of whom may have been priestesses of Artemis at one time, are firmly grounded in their newfound Christian faith. The reference to Adam and Eve in chapter 3 is not intended to be a first-century version of keeping the women at home barefoot and pregnant, but a reminder that Adam and Eve both had consequences for violating God’s only commandment. Even though Eve sinned first, Adam got the more strenuous of the two punishments: his “rule” over his wife was accompanied by working the land by the sweat of his brow daily to provide for his family.

I do hope you’ve found this rather lengthy article helpful when it comes to 1 Timothy 2. If you like it, I would encourage you to check my earlier article on 1 Timothy 3 with respect to women in leadership, which I now have to review to see if any of these new thoughts require an update. As always, my thoughts are my own, except where I give credit to those whom I cite. Peace to all.

Scott Stocking

Additional note (added 3/31/23): I came across the following reference in Apollodorus 1.4 (English translation edited by Sir James George Frazer; Perseus Tufts edition) and an accompanying footnote: “But Latona for her intrigue with Zeus was hunted by Hera over the whole earth, till she came to Delos and brought forth first Artemis, by the help of whose midwifery she afterwards gave birth to Apollo.” The portion of the footnote that is of interest addresses the statement that Artemis was the midwife for the birth of her twin brother! The footnote states, “The quaint legend, recorded by Apollodorus, that immediately after her birth Artemis helped her younger twin brother Apollo to be born into the world, is mentioned also by Serv. Verg. A. 3.73 and the Vatican Mythographers. The legend, these writers inform us, was told to explain why the maiden goddess Artemis was invoked by women in child-bed.” Could it be that Paul’s statement about women being saved through childbirth was meant to ensure that Ephesian women in that culture who may have called on Artemis while giving birth after they converted to Christianity would not be guilty of blasphemy or some other sin?

Reference (added 4/1/23): I just found an excellent series of articles looking at the influence of Artemis Ephesia in 1 Timothy 2. I’m glad I found it after I published my own article, because I consider that independent confirmation I’m on the right track. We have slightly different conclusions, and the author takes into account some Gnostic influences in the article, but overall, we have a very similar take on how to understand 1 Timothy 2 in a way that respects the equality of women in God’s kingdom. https://margmowczko.com/1-timothy-212-in-context-5/. It’s a five-part series, with this link being the final part, but it has links to the first four articles at the end.

[1] Brand, Chad, Charles Draper, Archie England, Steve Bond, E. Ray Clendenen, and Trent C. Butler, eds. 2003. “Artemis.” In Holman Illustrated Bible Dictionary, 121. Nashville, TN: Holman Bible Publishers.

[2] Claus, Patricia. Priestesses Among Few Women Who Had Status, Power in Ancient Greece. The Greek Reporter, December 5, 2022, accessed 03/29/23 https://greekreporter.com/2022/12/05/ancient-greece-women-priestesses

[3] BiblicalStudies.org.uk: Cult Prostitution In New Testament Ephesus: A Reappraisal by S. M. Baugh, accessed 03/26/23. https://biblicalstudies.org.uk/article_ephesus_baugh.html

[4] This conclusion is further demonstrated by comparing the terms used to describe the three classes of leaders (overseer, deacons, and women) in 1 Timothy 3:1–11, and even with the terms describing the widows in 1 Timothy 5.

[5] In 2 Thess 3:12, for example, the noun is used in contrast with those who would be “busybodies.”

[6] Paul’s mention of the man being created first here may in fact be a reference to the entire Creation narrative, so he wouldn’t have just the childbearing piece in mind, but everything that comes after that, including the offspring of the woman (Jesus) crushing Satan’s head. This is not uncommon for a NT writer or speaker to “economize” their words. Matthew cites Isaiah 7:14 about the virgin being with child to call to mind the entire Messianic section of Isaiah 6–11; Jesus quotes Psalm 22:1 on the cross to remind people that much of what is written in that psalm is coming true in his crucifixion.

October 3, 2022

Strength From (and for) Our Suffering: Paul’s Commissioning of Timothy (2 Timothy 1:1–14)

Filed under: 1 Timothy,2 Timothy,Biblical Studies,Courage,Ecclesiology,Faith, Faithfulness,Romans — Scott Stocking @ 10:22 pm
Tags: , , , , , ,

I preached this sermon October 2, 2022, at Peace Presbyterian Church in Omaha, NE. I forgot to bring my voice recorder, so unfortunately, I do not have an audio file for it. Peace Presbyterian opened in 1989 when the Presbytery closed down the Waterloo Presbyterian Church and my uncle, Kenneth Bunnell, Jr., moved from the pulpit there to Peace.

“Shrinking back” is the opposite of “faithfulness.”

I think most of us have had someone near and dear to us in our lives that wasn’t a blood relative. For some of us, it was someone we looked up to who was “cool” in their own way, and maybe even one who, although we couldn’t admit it out loud, we wanted as that third “parent” or our safety net when we thought our own parents didn’t understand us.

For others, maybe you were that cool one or caring one who latched on to a kid or young adult who truly needed a better environment or solid guidance and direction to get or keep their life on a good path. And when they succeeded, your heart filled with pride just as if they were your own child.

We see in the New Testament just such a relationship between the Apostle Paul and a young disciple named Timothy, and we can trace the evolution of their relationship throughout Paul’s letters. We first meet the “disciple” Timothy in Acts 16:1, in the town of Lystra, on Paul’s second missionary journey. A few chapters later, Luke calls Timothy and Erastus Paul’s “helpers.” It would seem Timothy had a strong desire help Paul spread the gospel across Asia Minor.

As we progress through Paul’s letters, we begin to see Paul’s descriptions of Timothy becoming more personal and familial: In Romans 16:21, “Timothy, my coworker”; in 1 Corinthians 4:17, “Timothy, my son whom I love, who is faithful in the Lord”; in 2 Corinthians 1:1 and Colossians 1:1, “Timothy our brother.” In Philippians, it seems Timothy has “risen” to equal status with Paul: “Servants of Jesus Christ.”

And when we come to the letters addressed to Timothy in the New Testament, we see the depth of Paul’s love for Timothy: “My true son in the faith”; “My dear son.” The two letters to Timothy are the first of only four letters Paul wrote to an individual instead of to a church. If it was even possible then, Timothy seems to have a risen to the status of an “Apostle-come-lately” just as Paul was. Paul’s letters to Timothy, then, are guidance on how to raise up men and women who could lead in the local church. Let’s listen to the first part of 2 Timothy chapter 1 and see how Paul speaks to Timothy in the historical context, and how that applies to those of us who lead and serve in the church in the modern context.

Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, in keeping with the promise of life that is in Christ Jesus, 2 To Timothy, my dear son: Grace, mercy and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Lord.

3 I thank God, whom I serve, as my ancestors did, with a clear conscience, as night and day I constantly remember you in my prayers. 4 Recalling your tears, I long to see you, so that I may be filled with joy. 5 I am reminded of your sincere faith, which first lived in your grandmother Lois and in your mother Eunice and, I am persuaded, now lives in you also.

6 For this reason I remind you to fan into flame the gift of God, which is in you through the laying on of my hands. 7 For the Spirit God gave us does not make us timid, but gives us power, love and self-discipline. 8 So do not be ashamed of the testimony about our Lord or of me his prisoner. Rather, join with me in suffering for the gospel, by the power of God. 9 He has saved us and called us to a holy life—not because of anything we have done but because of his own purpose and grace. This grace was given us in Christ Jesus before the beginning of time, 10 but it has now been revealed through the appearing of our Savior, Christ Jesus, who has destroyed death and has brought life and immortality to light through the gospel. 11 And of this gospel I was appointed a herald and an apostle and a teacher. 12 That is why I am suffering as I am. Yet this is no cause for shame, because I know whom I have believed, and am convinced that he is able to guard what I have entrusted to him until that day.

13 What you heard from me, keep as the pattern of sound teaching, with faith and love in Christ Jesus. 14 Guard the good deposit that was entrusted to you—guard it with the help of the Holy Spirit who lives in us.[1]

Paul is not just making a passing reference to the influence of his ancestors on his faith and service in verse 3; he mentions them as a comparison to the faith Timothy’s mother Eunice, who was a Jew, and her mother (presumably) Lois had and how they had passed that faith down to Timothy. In verse 4, Paul also seems to allude here to his tearful farewell meeting with the Ephesian elders in Miletus, as we read about in Acts 20. He knew suffering and prison awaited him in the future as he returns to Jerusalem, but he was set on pressing forward nonetheless.

In verse 6, Paul sets the tone for the encouragement he is offering Timothy by first reminding Timothy of his own ordination, a confirmation of his calling: “Fan into flame the gift of God!” It would seem after the personal instructions and teaching of the first letter, Paul is now commissioning Timothy to prepare him for his first located ministry. We know from 1 Timothy that Paul had appointed him to preach in Ephesus, perhaps one of the largest group of believers in Asia Minor. Timothy is apparently coming to the church on the heels of Paul’s 2+ years of ministry in Ephesus, perhaps just before he’s arrested if we can assume that from v. 8, so it would have been a daunting task for anyone to step into those shoes.

That’s why in vs. 7, Paul reminds Timothy that the Holy Spirit dwelling in us “does not make us timid, but gives us power, love, and self-discipline.” Timothy may realize that he could face the same fate as Paul in being arrested (and indeed, we learn from the end of Hebrews that he had in fact been in prison), but Paul knows the only way to put forth a convincing gospel presentation about life in the hereafter is to proclaim it with and in the power and authority of the Holy Spirit. The message of the gospel must stand in contrast to the spiritual darkness of the world around them, full of light and truth. Otherwise, what would be the attraction of the gospel?

Also note in vs. 7 that, even though Paul is addressing Timothy personally in the whole letter, the promise of the power of the Spirit of God is not just for Timothy. When Paul speaks of “us” here, he’s not using the royal “we.” At the very least, Paul is may be referring back to his ancestors and Timothy’s mother and grandmother whom he mentioned in his opening; it’s even more likely that he is including all believers everywhere. You only need to flip back a few pages into 1 Timothy to see this is the case, where he not only gives basic instructions for praying men, modestly-dress women, and lonely widows in chapters 2 and 6 (all of which indicate some sort of submission or humility before Christ, so there’s no sexism there), but also instructions in 1 Timothy 3 for the character qualities of overseers, deacons, and women who were leading in the local church at that time.

In verse 8, Paul puts some meat on the bone as to what it means to be timid by exhorting Timothy to “not be ashamed of the testimony about our Lord or of me his prisoner.” Paul is speaking here of his own “testimony,” (in the language of the New Testament, the same word from which we get the English word “martyr”), that got him thrown into prison. That testimony was not just the words Paul spoke about the gospel, but the life he lived for the gospel. It involved his whole self, mind, body, and soul, or as Paul puts it in verse 11: “herald, apostle, and teacher.” Paul then makes Timothy an offer some might not be willing to take: “You’re living in God’s power now, so go ahead and join me in my own suffering.”

Now verse 8 here sounds much like Romans 1:16–17:

16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God that brings salvation to everyone who believes: first to the Jew, then to the Gentile. 17 For in the gospel the righteousness of God is revealed—a righteousness that is by faith from first to last, just as it is written: “The righteous will live by faith.”[2]

The gospel of Christ is powerful to bring salvation. But what gives the gospel, the “good news” of Christ, its power? It’s powerful because it was perfectly lived out by God’s own son, Jesus Christ. That’s the crux of the argument Paul lays out in the first 8 chapters of Romans: Jesus did not break the law of God, so he was the only one to earn the designation “righteous.” Look at the last phrase in Romans 1:17: “The righteous will live by faith.” The Hebrew of Habakkuk 2:4, from which Paul quotes this verse, is a bit more nuanced: “The righteous person will live by his faithfulness.” It’s not clear why the NT translator didn’t follow the OT translation here, but do you see the implications here? If, as Paul says in Romans 3, “There is no one righteous, not even one,” then who is the righteous one who lives by faithfulness in Romans 1:17? That could only be Jesus, right? The author of Hebrews puts it this way: “But my righteous one will live by faith. And I take no pleasure in the one who shrinks back. But we do not belong to those who shrink back and are destroyed, but to those who have faith and are saved.”

So we see more clearly now the urgent reason why Paul is so strongly exhorting Timothy here: Being timid about the Gospel; being ashamed of the Gospel; fretting about the suffering for the gospel that is difficult for sure, but for most, nothing like what Jesus himself went through, is “shrinking back” according to the author of Hebrews. “Shrinking back” is the opposite of “faithfulness.”

Getting back to the 2 Timothy passage, Paul tells us in vs. 10 that Jesus’s life and crucifixion worked to “destroy death” and to bring “life and immortality to light through the gospel.” As the perfect lamb of God, Jesus’s own physical body was “destroyed” on the cross so that in his death and resurrection, he could destroy death and its power forever! As believers, we have been made alive in Christ. Our eternal life doesn’t begin when we die. Our eternal life has already begun in Christ.

In 2 Timothy 1:12, Paul again reminds Timothy that suffering for the gospel is no cause for shame. As Jesus said, we only need faith the size of a mustard seed to move mountains. Taking that first step of faith, planting that mustard seed, if you will, can be difficult. But once we start down that road of faithfulness to what he’s called us to, it becomes difficult to turn back. We may feel unworthy like the servants in the Luke passage we read, but we have a sure hope that our own faithfulness will be rewarded. Like Paul, we can have assurance that God is with us along the way. I love the last part of vs. 12 here: “I know whom I have believed, and am convinced that he is able to guard what I have entrusted to him until that day.”

Paul closes out his charge to Timothy by calling on him to keep the faith and do his part to “guard the good deposit…with the help of the Holy Spirit.” This hearkens back to Deuteronomy, where the Lord, through Moses, repeats the refrain throughout the book to “be careful to obey what I’ve commanded. Obedience and faithfulness are not accidents. They are intentional choices we make to step toward and into the will of God.

What are some practical ways we can guard the good deposit? That’s where Psalm 37 comes in, the one we read earlier in the service. It involves both “dos” and “don’ts.”

Trust in the Lord (2x)Do not fret (3x)
Dwell in the landDo not be envious
Do goodRefrain from anger
Commit your way to the LordTurn from wrath
Take delight in the LordTurn away from godless chatter (1 Timothy 6:20)
Be stillTurn away from the opposing ideas of what is falsely called knowledge (1 Timothy 6:20)
Wait patiently 

Most of us have heard the phrase, “Let’s get ready to rumble.” Michael Buffer, the famous professional ring announcer for boxing matches, coined and trademarked the phrase to kick off boxing matches. As Christians, we face a “rumble” of our own when it comes to the world. Even in Timothy’s day, he needed the encouragement of his mentor and coworker Paul to not get discouraged in the face of the spiritual battles they faced with respect to persecution. This is why it is so important to hold onto the fellowship we have with one another. As Paul did for Timothy, we can encourage each other and draw strength from one another when the rumble comes our way. The scriptures we looked at this morning lay out a strategy for us to stand strong and keep the faith. Let’s go from here and advance the kingdom in the power of the Holy Spirit. Amen.

[1] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[2] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

“Opportunity Cost” in God’s Economy: The Rich Man and Lazarus (Luke 16:19–31)

Filed under: 1 Timothy,Biblical Studies,Greek,Life of Christ,Luke Gospel of,Repentance,Soteriology — Scott Stocking @ 9:27 pm
Tags: , , , , , ,
Click to Listen

Prosperity without genuine charity magnifies disparity.

I preached this sermon at Mt. View Presbyterian Church, Omaha, NE, September 25, 2022. Lightly edited for publication.

19 “There was a rich man who was dressed in purple and fine linen and lived in luxury every day. 20 At his gate was laid a beggar named Lazarus, covered with sores 21 and longing to eat what fell from the rich man’s table. Even the dogs came and licked his sores.

22 “The time came when the beggar died and the angels carried him to Abraham’s side. The rich man also died and was buried. 23 In Hades, where he was in torment, he looked up and saw Abraham far away, with Lazarus by his side. 24 So he called to him, ‘Father Abraham, have pity on me and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, because I am in agony in this fire.’

25 “But Abraham replied, ‘Son, remember that in your lifetime you received your good things, while Lazarus received bad things, but now he is comforted here and you are in agony. 26 And besides all this, between us and you a great chasm has been set in place, so that those who want to go from here to you cannot, nor can anyone cross over from there to us.’

27 “He answered, ‘Then I beg you, father, send Lazarus to my family, 28 for I have five brothers. Let him warn them, so that they will not also come to this place of torment.’

29 “Abraham replied, ‘They have Moses and the Prophets; let them listen to them.’

30 “ ‘No, father Abraham,’ he said, ‘but if someone from the dead goes to them, they will repent.’

31 “He said to him, ‘If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.’ ”[1]

One of the talk show hosts I like to listen to, Dan Bongino, is fond of talking about an economic concept called “opportunity cost.” The phrase has been around since 1894, according to Merriam-Webster. The concept is pretty easy to grasp, and something most of us understand instinctively: it’s the difference between the most efficient and profitable uses of one’s time, money, talents, and resources and the less efficient or more wasteful uses of those assets. Opportunity costs are hard to ignore, but there are times when we may not be able to avoid settling for less. Sometimes, the costs are more obvious. Do I use my tax refund to pay down some debt or buy a brand new 80″ ultramegasuperduper high-definition television? Do I buy new boat to take out on weekends or my wife a more reliable car? (For the record, I have no desire to buy a boat.)

At other times, the opportunity costs may be a little more difficult to calculate. Do I stay home and have some “me” time after a busy week watching the grandkids, or do I go hang out with my friends at dinner or a show? Do my wife and I take a vacation with or without the kids?

The pandemic pushed people into weighing opportunity costs with respect to their jobs. Do I really want to work at home isolated, or do I want to be in the office where I’m around interesting people? Should I stick with what’s comfortable and familiar, or should I spread my wings a bit and see if there’s something more satisfying for me to bring home the bacon.

But perhaps the greatest opportunity cost befalls us with respect to how we use our time. Job opportunities abound. Setting aside tragic what-ifs for the moment, we are generally hopeful that if we don’t see a friend today, we can see them tomorrow. But like lost sleep, lost time is something we can never get back. No one has figured out how to make time run in reverse (except perhaps that time in 2 Kings 20:11 where God made the shadow move backwards on the temple steps).

But I digress. Benjamin Franklin said, “If time be of all things the most precious, wasting time must be the greatest prodigality” (think “prodigal son”).

Do you all remember Andy Rooney? He used to come on at the end of 60 Minutes in the 70s and 80s with the wittiest and most profound take on the events of the day. In one of those commentaries, he apparently was reflecting on life lessons learned, and he talked about some things he had learned: “Opportunities are never lost; someone will take the ones you miss.”

The 19th century Presbyterian minister Theodore L. Cuyler, however, probably says it best, especially in relation to our gospel passage this morning: “Tears never yet saved a soul. Hell is full of weepers weeping over lost opportunities, perhaps over the rejection of an offered Saviour. Your Bible does not say ‘Weep, and be saved.’ It says, ‘Believe, and be saved.’ Faith is better than feeling.”

Jesus’s story of the rich man and Lazarus comes at the end of a couple chapters’ worth of stories that focus on opportunity costs. The shepherd went looking for the lost sheep so he could know whether it truly was lost or if it had been attacked by a predator. He went looking so he’d know whether he had to be more vigilant for such predators. It was worth the woman’s time to sweep the whole house to find the valuable missing coin. On the flip side, we see the “prodigality” (to use Ben Franklin’s word) of the younger son, who wasted any profitable opportunities he may have had with his share of the inheritance by spending it on himself.

And in the first part of chapter 16, we see a shrewd but perhaps unfaithful steward of his master’s accounts. Before the steward loses his job, he “discounts” what his master’s clients owe to try to settle up the accounts. Some think this was dishonest in that he had no right to do that with his master’s outstanding assets, but some have suggested he may have been deducting any interest accrued, since it was against Jewish law to charge interest. Regardless, the steward seems to have used this opportunity to “win friends and influence people” by cutting deals with the clients, perhaps in hope of winning their favor and getting hired at his next job.

So let’s break down this story. The first thing that strikes us is that the rich man is not given a name in the story.[2] Only the poor man has a name, Lazarus. “Lazarus” is a latinized form of the Hebrew name Eleazar, which means “whom God helps.” The story is probably fictional, so there doesn’t seem to be a connection with Jesus’s friend Lazarus, whom he actually did raise from the dead. The fact that the rich man didn’t have a name in the story most likely stuck in the craw of any rich people listening to the story: after all, THEY were important; THEY had money and influence; and THEY could make your life miserable if they wanted to. You needed to know who they were so you could step aside for them!

So the rich man lived in the lap of luxury, feasting every day and never giving one thought, if he knew about him at all, to Lazarus. Lazarus was so crippled and destitute that he couldn’t get around on his own. Lazarus was completely dependent on others to move him around. It’s not clear why or how he winds up at the gate of this man. Was he Lazarus’s relative? A doctor? Or did he have some friends who worked as servants for the man and hoped to bring him some scraps later? However he was related to those around him, it’s obvious he was completely dependent on the mercy of others, including any friends he may have had. He could probably see or hear the man feasting in the house every day. And the purple robes were just salt in the wound, because purple was the symbol of ultimate wealth. What utter torture that must have been for Lazarus to watch and listen to the opulent lifestyle the man lived. His torture was only amplified by the dogs licking his sores with their rough tongues.

As the story goes, it would seem Lazarus and the rich man both died around the same time. Jesus uses the story to give us what I believe is a figurative look at the afterlife. Lazarus is helped by God as Jesus says the angels came and carried him away to Abraham’s side. In Jewish literature, this meant paradise. He was in a place of safety and security, awaiting the consummation of history. He was finally experiencing the comfort and healing that he never had a shot at in life. But for the rich man, the contrast is obvious. With all his wealth and selfish self-importance, he doesn’t get a parade of angels. He’s just buried. No pomp or circumstance. No mention of an elaborate funeral procession. No mention of any mourners expressing sorrow or grief at the loss of a loved one. To make it worse, we find out in vs. 23 that the rich man wound up in Hades, the abode of the dead in Greek mythology. That would have been the equivalent of hell or eternal punishment in the Jewish worldview.

Now it’s not clear whether you can actually see heaven from hell or vice versa, but Revelation seems to suggest you might be able to. At the judgment scene in Revelation, we read of God casting those whose names are not in the Book of Life in the Lake of Fire. So the description may have a ring of truth to it.

But back to the story. The rich man sees Lazarus in a comfort far more luxurious than he ever experienced and longs for just a drop of water from the tip of Lazarus’s finger. Abraham chides him and reminds him that he had made his choices in life. He chose to ignore and maybe even despise the suffering of Lazarus. He also chose to ignore Moses and the prophets and what they said about being right with God, so God gave him the punishment he deserved. If you spend your life running away from God instead of toward God, then God grants your wish in the end. Scary thought.

The rich man realizes he’s lost his opportunity at eternal comfort. That was his opportunity cost, and the cost had eternal consequences. He didn’t have the time or character to honor God while he was on earth, so now God doesn’t have time for him. As he comes to that realization, he pleads with Abraham to allow Lazarus to return to the land of the living as a testimony to his own family. Unfortunately, Abraham tells him that not even someone returning from the dead would be a powerful enough testimony to convince them to change their ways and believe in the possibility of eternal life in paradise. The testimony of the Old Testament, Moses, and the prophets, should be enough to convince people of this. It’s too little, too late for the rich man, and apparently for his family as well, although they still had a chance while they were alive.

Lazarus was helpless to do anything for himself. And it would seem like even his friends, if he had had any to begin with, had forgotten him. But apparently Lazarus had not given up his hope in God. These past three years with the COVID lockdowns was difficult for all, but especially for the most vulnerable. I’m sure it was difficult to limit family contacts for many of us. I’m sure many of us felt some sense of loneliness or helplessness at one time or another.

If you experienced a sense of any of this loss or disconnect, regardless of what caused it, you probably know at least a little bit how Lazarus feels in this situation. As I said earlier, the Lazarus story is most likely a parable, even though it’s not introduced in that way. It was unusual to mention a character by name in a parable, but the name, if it was a fiction, symbolizes the main point of the story: we need God’s help.

The rich man certainly could have used some help for his own situation, as he found out too late. He had obviously put his trust in his riches and was selfish to his own eternal detriment. Prosperity without genuine charity magnifies disparity. The rich man should have at least known Psalm 10:3–4:

3 [The wicked man] boasts about the cravings of his heart;
he blesses the greedy and reviles the Lord.

4 In his pride the wicked man does not seek him;
in all his thoughts there is no room for God.[3]

A short time after Jesus ascended to heaven, we see Paul warning about the pitfalls of greed in the absence of an awareness of God. If Paul was aware of Jesus’s teaching about Lazarus and the rich man, this seems to be the time and place for Paul to warn Timothy not to fall into the trap of greed:

6 But godliness with contentment is great gain. 7 For we brought nothing into the world, and we can take nothing out of it. 8 But if we have food and clothing, we will be content with that. 9 Those who want to get rich fall into temptation and a trap and into many foolish and harmful desires that plunge people into ruin and destruction. 10 For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil. Some people, eager for money, have wandered from the faith and pierced themselves with many griefs.[4]

This seems to be where the rich man is at. Notice the warning here, especially in vs. 10: “The love of money is a root of all kinds of evil.” First we see the love of money not the ONLY root of evil, nor is it a root of ALL evil. The love of money may be manifest in any number of situations and encounters. It can lead to coveting, desiring things we cannot afford or shouldn’t have in the first place. In some contexts, coveting even refers to planning how to get those things by illicit or illegal acts. Of course, what naturally follows, if such greed or lust is not kept in check, is stealing, fraud, or some other conspiracy. The rich man could have kept his greed and uncompassionate response in check by looking first to the God of his forefathers, as Jesus indicates in the parable, and perhaps opened up an opportunity for himself to experience what Lazarus had in Abraham’s bosom. He could very easily have helped Lazarus. He had access to God’s help just like Lazarus did.

One of the places I’ve looked for this help from the earliest days of my faith in Christ, especially when I’ve been scared or uncertain about the future, is Psalm 91. Let’s hear the first four verses again:

1 Whoever dwells in the shelter of the Most High
will rest in the shadow of the Almighty.

2 I will say of the Lord, “He is my refuge and my fortress,
my God, in whom I trust.”

3 Surely he will save you
from the fowler’s snare
and from the deadly pestilence.

4 He will cover you with his feathers,
and under his wings you will find refuge;
his faithfulness will be your shield and rampart. [5]

The word for “save” here is not the typical word for salvation, which would have been the same root from which we get Jesus’ name. It has more to do with being rescued or protected from something harmful. In the case of Jesus’s parable, since the story is probably fictional, it doesn’t make any sense to try to figure out why Lazarus was the way he was. The grammar of the description suggests that he had been that way for quite some time. As such, it’s important to note the story says he had the privilege of being carried away by the angels upon his death. Even though he experienced what appears to be a “deadly pestilence,” God did save him from it in great style by having the angels carry him off to paradise. What a ride that must have been!

Application & Conclusion

I was at a men’s retreat Friday and Saturday. One of the speakers, a pastor who leads a Celebrate Recovery group at a church here in Omaha, spoke about how certain types of sins involving thought and desire (lust, porn, greed, hatred), when left unchecked, can act on our brains much like a drug does if we become addicted to it. To put it simply, these things can train our brain to think there’s only one path, to the exclusion of all others, we can take to address these desires, and too often, that path is destructive to ourselves and to others. Recovery comes when we find alternate paths that are not destructive to address our addictions and our negative thought processes. When we put our faith, hope, and trust in God; when we come to him as our refuge and fortress; the God of the universe opens up a universe of possibilities for us to be healed from these destructive tendencies. If we’re honest with ourselves, I think we can all find areas that we need to surrender to God so we can experience life in this world more fully in his presence. We many never get in the shape Lazarus was in, but God is still there to help us through and bring us eternal salvation and comfort. And on the flip side of that, we may never get as greedy and selfish as the rich man, but God can still break through that if we let him so we can better share the love and grace of God with others. Amen?

[1] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[2] Some traditions ascribe the name Dives (DEE-ves) to the man, since that is the Latin word for “rich man” in the Vulgate.

[3] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[4] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[5] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

November 3, 2011

Qualifications of Male and Female Leaders in the Church (1 Timothy)

Filed under: 1 Timothy,Biblical Studies,Ecclesiology,Ephesians,Titus,Women in Leadership — Scott Stocking @ 11:32 pm

I would have to venture a guess that 1 Timothy 3 is a close second to Ephesians as a section of Scripture to which I have devoted a significant amount of scholarly research through the years. In 1995, I presented my first professional paper at the Fellowship of Professors (now the Stone-Campbell Journal Conference) at St. Louis Christian College on 1 Timothy 3 and 5 and the leadership roles and qualifications Paul assigns to women in those passages. After reading through 1 Timothy 2 and 3 this weekend, I can see that, although my original paper was respectable, I have learned a great deal more about Greek structure, syntax, and semantics in the last 16 years that would greatly enhance my initial offering.

The appendix table at the end of this post catalogs significant word usage in 1 Timothy primarily, but also in the pastoral epistles generally, especially where gender and leadership roles not only are discussed but intersect. A quick glance at the table demonstrates first and foremost the overlapping language applied to men and women, whether the regular saint or the recognized leader. At the very least, being a faithful Christian undoubtedly made one notable as leadership material.

Women in Leadership?

I’ve spent considerable time putting that table together, so let me cut to the chase here, since my main purpose is talking about women in leadership in the body of Christ. In 1 Timothy 3, Paul is addressing the leadership core Timothy was responsible for training. The passage mentions the “elder” (ἐπίσκοπος episkopos \eh PEE skaw pawss\, lit. “overseer” [one who holds the title]; note that the word is singular in this passage) and “deacons” or “ministers” (διάκονος diakonos \dee AH kaw nawss\ also “servant”), but it also mentions “women.” If you look at any Bible with footnotes, you will see there is some significant difference in how the translations understand the reference to “women” in 3:11. I have arranged the following verses (all from Logos versions of the respective Bibles) in the order I consider to be the most literal translation to the freest translation, highlighting the English word translated from γυνή (gynē \goo NAY\, “woman, wife”) and the respective versions’ footnotes under each verse:

‎‎‎‎AV    Even so must their wives be grave, not slanderers, sober, faithful in all things.

‎‎ESV    Their wives likewise must be dignified, not slanderers, but sober-minded, faithful in all things.

Wives likewise must or Women likewise must [i.e. no “Their”]

‎‎NASB95    Women must likewise be dignified, not malicious gossips, but temperate, faithful in all things.

i.e. either deacons’ wives or deaconesses

NIV84    In the same way, their wives are to be women worthy of respect, not malicious talkers but temperate and trustworthy in everything.

deaconesses

‎‎NIV    In the same way, the women are to be worthy of respect, not malicious talkers but temperate and trustworthy in everything.

possibly deacons’ wives or women who are deacons

‎‎‎‎NLT    In the same way, their wives must be respected and must not slander others. They must exercise self-control and be faithful in everything they do.

or the women deacons; the Greek word can be translated women or wives

Message    No exceptions are to be made for women—same qualifications: serious, dependable, not sharp-tongued, not overfond of wine.

You can see right away where the issue lies with this passage: Are the “women” the wives of the leaders mentioned (if “wives” is intended, then “deacons’ wives” is more likely, given that “overseer” is singular in this passage) or any women in the church? In 1 Timothy 2:9–12, Paul seems to address “women” generally, not “wives” specifically. Is there any reason to think he would switch up in this passage? The difference in translations is obvious, but none of the translations are wrong per se in translating the word either “women” or “wives.” What concerns me as a scholar about the translation is the “gloss” (a word added presumably for clarification) of the plural possessive pronoun “their” in some of the versions. (You will notice that I italicized it in the verses, a common practice in more literal translations to indicate the word is not directly translated from a Greek word in the text.) Granted, this is a plausible translation, but not a necessary one. It is also highly interpretive. I’m not saying the Bible translation committees necessarily had agendas or were wrong to add the gloss, but it is something that the savvy Bible student should consider when studying this passage.

A Structure Word

Another word that reveals the structure of the passage is ὡσαύτως (hōsautōs \hoh SOW tohss\ “likewise”). The word is found 17 times in the NT, including four times in 1 Timothy, and implies not only a similarity of action, but a similarity of the subjects of those actions being compared. What is interesting is this word is found three verses earlier, in 1 Timothy 3:8: “Deacons likewise…” The question is, “Like what?” or “Like whom?” The obvious answer is like the elder in vs. 2. This point is even more obvious when one considers that there is no main verb in vv. 8 or 11: the verb is actually borrowed from vs. 2: “It is necessary for the elder [and deacons and women] to be….” The passage has a parallel structure signifying three leadership roles: elder, deacon, and women.

So what does that mean for the role of women specifically? I think it is important at this point to bring in a couple more passages of Scripture so we can have a broader view of the role of women in early church leadership. Titus 1–2 gives further instructions on elders (both the ἐπίσκοπος and the πρεσβῦτ- kind). The role of the “older women” (πρεσβῦτις presbytis \press BOO tihss\) was to teach the younger women to be more Christ-like. I think that is a perfect example of an appropriate role for female leaders in the church: teaching younger women. In 1 Timothy 5, Paul uses similar language to 1 Timothy 3 in describing the widows, especially those who are older, will probably not remarry, and have significant time to devote to serving the Lord and his people (see also 1 Corinthians 7:8, 34b). It would not surprise me to find that Paul’s reference to women leaders in 1 Timothy 3:11 included widows, especially since the larger context of the epistle supports that idea.

Backtracking

Now that I’ve put out there what is sure to be controversial among my more conservative readers, I want to backtrack a bit and talk about the first part of 1 Timothy 3. I mentioned above that the word for “elder” in v. 2 is singular. The passage actually uses a feminine form of the word for elder, which implies the office or the abstract concept of eldership, not necessarily the gender of the person holding the office. The question to ask is, “Why is this term singular when ‘deacons’ (v. 8) and ‘women’ (v. 11) are plural? Don’t most churches have more than one elder?”

A more literal rendering of ἐπίσκοπος may shed some light on the subject. The word is a compound of ἐπί (“over”) and σκοπός (“see, watch” e.g. “scope”), so some literally translate the word “overseer” (see for example 1 Peter 2:25, where Peter describes Jesus as “the Shepherd and Overseer of your souls”), and it eventually made its way into English as “bishop” (Gk episkopos > Latin episcopus > Old English bisceop [Merriam-Webster]), which is how some older English versions render the word. I have run in some circles where the concept of a lead pastor is frowned upon by leadership. One man should not have such authority over a congregation, so they say. But I think we find support for that concept in 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1–2. Certainly any pastor should have the qualifications of an elder, and I would argue that the pastor should be considered a member of the eldership in whatever church he (or she!) serves. The job of an “overseer” (for I equate “overseer” with “senior” or “lead pastor”) is not to run the whole show alone, but to equip others for works of service to build up the body of Christ (Ephesians 4:11–13). I am quite comfortable with the concept of a senior pastor when the duties and responsibilities of such are rightly understood and when such a person lives up to those responsibilities.

As a side note, when the words for elder are used in the plural (Acts 20:28, Philippians 1:1 for ἐπίσκοπος), I believe they refer to the group of those who lead individual house churches. Titus was instructed to appoint πρεσβυτέρους (plural form, 1:5), but then Paul immediately writes about the ἐπίσκοπος (singular, 1:7).

Conclusion

I think it is important that we have a proper understanding of Scripture, otherwise I wouldn’t write this blog. But it is equally important that we not force one view upon another. As I discussed in the 1 Corinthians post on tongues, love must come first in any doctrinal discussion. Teaching without love and compassion is little more than indoctrination. As a pastor, I wouldn’t impose the concept of women in leadership on a congregation that wasn’t ready for it, but I wouldn’t hesitate to teach the concept whenever the opportunity arose. And I would always make sure the leadership in any church I served understood what I believe about the subject without insisting that they all jump on board. I am presenting the evidence here: it’s up to others whether they choose to be convinced by my reasoning and studies.

If you have stories about how your congregation has handled the role of women in leadership, I would love for you to share them in the comments. Thank you for reading!

Peace,

Scott Stocking

Appendix: Word Usage by Gender and Office in the Pastoral Epistles

Word

Transliteration/ Pronunciation

Meaning

Mena

Womenb

Eldersc

Deaconsd

Others
ἡσύχιος hēsychios \hay SOO khee awss\ adjective: quiet 1 Ti 2:2 1 Ti 2:2;
1 Pe 3:4*
ἡσυχία, hēsychia
\–KHEE ah\		 quietness 1 Ti 2:12(?);
2 Th 3:12e
 1 Ti 2:11–12;
2 Th 3:12
εὐσέβειαf eusebeia \you SEH bay ah\ godliness 1 Ti 2:2, 3:16,
4:7–8g; 6:11c Ti 2:12 (εὐσεβῶς) 		1 Ti 2:2, 3:16; Ti 2:12 (εὐσεβῶς)
 4:7–8; 6:11c 1 Ti 5:4 (εὐσεβέω to widows);
θεοσέβεια theosebeia \theh aw–\ godliness 1 Ti 2:10*
σεμνότης semnotēs \sem NAW tayss\ dignity 1Ti 2:2, 3:4; Ti 2:7 1 Ti 3:4; Ti 2:2
σεμνός semnos
\–NAWSS\		 dignified 1 Ti 3:8;
Ti 2:2		 1 Ti 3:11 1 Ti 3:8
κόσμιος* kosmios \KAWSS mee awss\ respectable; appropriate 1 Ti 3:2 1 Ti 2:9 1 Ti 3:2
κοσμέω kosmeō \–MEH oh\ I adorn 1 Ti 2:9,
1 Pe 3:5		 Ti 2:10 (slaves)
πρέπει prepei \PREH pay\ verb: it is proper for 1 Ti 2:10 Ti 2:1 (sound doctrine)
ὑποταγή hypotagē \hoo paw tah GAY\ submission 1 Ti 2:11 1 Ti 3:4 (children)
ὑποτάσσω hypotassō
\–TAHSS soh\		 I submit to 1 Co 14:34
ἐπιτρέπω epitrepō \eh pee TREH poh\ I permit 1 Co 14:34
αὐθεντέω* authenteō \ow then TEH oh\ I usurp authority 1 Ti 2:12
σωφροσύνη* sōphrosynē \soh fraw SOO nay\ sound judgment; moderation 1 Ti 2:9, 15
σωφρόνως* sōphronōs
\–FRAW nohss\		 moderately Ti 2:12 Ti 2:12
σωφρονισμός* sōphronismos
\–nee SMOSS\		 sound judgment; moderation 2 Ti 1:7h 2 Ti 1:7h
σώφρων* sōphrōn \–frohn\ adjective: moderate Ti 2:2 Ti 2:5 (younger) 1 Ti 3:2; Ti 1:8, 2:2
μιᾶς γυναικὸς ἄνδρα mias gynaikos andra “one-woman man” 1 Ti 3:2, 12 (plural); Ti 1:6
ἑνὸς ἀνδρὸς γυνή henos andros gynē “one-man woman” 1 Ti 5:9 1 Ti 5:9 (widows)
νηφάλιος* nēphalios \nay FAH lee awss\ temperate 1 Ti 3:2; Ti 2:2 1 Ti 3:11 1 Ti 3:2; Ti 2:2
προί̈στημι proistēmi \praw EESS tay mee\ I manage 1 Th 5:12;
1 Ti 3:4–5, 12;
Ti 3:8, 14		 1 Th 5:12; Ti 3:8, 14 1 Ti 3:4–5; 5:17 1 Ti 3:12 1 Ti 5:14 (οἰκοδεσποτέω young widows manage home)
πάροινος* paroinos \PAH roy nawss\ addicted to wine 1 Ti 3:3;
Ti 1:7
μὴ οἴνῳ πολλῷ προσέχοντας mē oinō pollō prosechontas not given to much wine 1 Ti 3:8 1 Ti 3:8
διάβολος diabolos \dee AH baw lawss\ devil; slanderer 1 Ti 3:6–7 1 Ti 3:11;
Ti 2:3		 1 Ti 3:6–7
ὡσαύτως hōsautōs \hoh SOW tohss\ adverb: likewise 1 Ti 2:9, 3:11 1 Ti 3:8 1 Ti 5:24 (bad & good deeds)
ἀνεπίλημπτος anepilēmptos \ah neh PEE laym ptawss\ blameless 1 Ti 3:2 1 Ti 5:7 1 Ti 3:2 1 Ti 5:7 (widows)

* Indicates that all occurrences of the word in the New Testament are listed here.

a Translated from ἀνήρ (anēr \ah NAYR\, “man, husband”; 1 Ti 2:8, 12; 3:2, 12; 5:9; Ti 1:6; 2:5); πρεσβύτης (presbytēs \press BOO tayss\, “old man, elder [holds title]”; Ti 2:2; and πρεσβύτερος (presbyteros \press BOO teh ross\, comparative adjective “older man, elder [holds title]”; 1 Ti 5:1–2, 17, 19; Ti 1:5; 1 Pet 5:1, 5). The generic word for “human” (ἄνθρωπος anthrōpos \AHN throw pawss\) is presumed to refer to both men and women unless context suggests otherwise.

b Translated from γυνή (gynē \goo NAY\, “woman, wife”; 1 Ti 2:9–12, 14; 3:2, 11–12; 5:9; Ti 1:6); πρεσβῦτις (presbytis \press BOO tihss\ “old woman, elder [holds title(??)]”; Ti 2:3).

c Translated from ἐπισκοπή (episkopē \eh pihss kaw PAY\, “office/function of elder”; 1 Ti 3:1); ἐπίσκοπος (episkopos \eh PIHSS kaw pawss\, “elder” [one who holds the title]; 1 Ti 3:2; Ti 1:7); πρεσβύτης; πρεσβῦτις; and (συμ*)πρεσβύτερος ([sym]presbyteros \[soom] press BOO teh ross\ comparative adjective “older man, [fellow] elder [holds title]”; 1 Ti 5:1–2, 17, 19; Ti 1:5; 1 Pet 5:1*, 5); πρεσβυτέριον (presbyterion press boo TEH ree awn\ noun “council of elders [holds title]”; 1 Ti 4:14).

d Transliterated from διάκονος (diakonos \dee AH kaw nawss\ “servant, deacon”; 1 Ti 3:8, 12; 4:6).

e Part of a command to the disruptive busybodies identified in 2 Th 3:11.

f Generic references or descriptions in 4:8 (1x); 6:3–6 (3x).

g Verb is second person singular, so presumably referring to Timothy only.

h A generalized statement in the midst of specific instructions to Timothy himself.


NOTE: Minor formatting issues were fixed on 11/4, along with clearing up a dangling modifier in the first paragraph. Other minor edits made 1/26/22.

Website Powered by WordPress.com.